Lotus

Didn't he used to play for Cruzeiro?

De Jong Pavlyuchenko Turan

Shirley it would be more likely for Bentley to go to Liverpool and Blackburn to use some of the money to buy Milner. Seems more to everyones level tbh.

Well, here's a post that's genuinely worth the read. How increasingly rare!

Always thought the Shepherd Chairmanship received unwarranted criticism. However i do concede we'd slipped back a bit but that does happen. The Board made a few bad decisions, some you could only say so retrospectively and some seemd stupid to everyone but them at the time, but to err is human. However, if the criteria for judging the new Board that they qualify for CL 3 years running starting from 2008/9 then i'll have to that that is idiocy. A Shepherd-Allardyce combination would not have acheived that. Had Ashley taken over when SBR was at the club and we had good players then it would have been the minimum i'd of demanded, however, after 2 years of Souness, 1 of Roeder and 1/2 of BSA a top half finish would be a good start, maybe top 6 the season after. I can't think of a single NUFC player who i'd be desperate to keep so we would need a few very good ones to lift us above mediocrity and those sort of changes rarely happen in one transfer window.

De Jong would be better tbh.

Personally think Pavlyuchenko has good potential. i also think de Jong is a better player than Englemar (sp?) Russian RB also looked decent, in fact both their FB's has plenty of pace and used the ball well. Pavlyuchenko looked a lot better than Gomis, that's for sure!

Or possibly Benny realises there's something seriously wrong with Pennant's head. Well he will soon find out there is a lot wrong with Milner's legs. I understand the point you're making but Pennant's also got problems and shortcomings as a player. I'm no fan of Milner particularly and i'd be surprised if this rumour actually came to pass.

Or possibly Benny realises there's something seriously wrong with Pennant's head.

Bellamy was good enough to last at least a season at Liverpool.

No comments on the fact that the new chairman gets twice as much as the old chairman got criticised for taking despite presiding over the club's worst season in the premiership, sacking a manager mid season without a replacement lined up, and failing to land any of the new manager's transfer targets (all things the old chairman would surely have been crucified for)? Not actually sure that Mort had a lot of say in the sacking of BSA. I'm pretty sure we've finished lower than 12th too. Not defending Mort btw, cause i'm don't really know what he did to deserve any praise or criticism tbh.

Even with the Modric signing they still lack character, I still feel they are a fancy pants team and nothing more. They severely lack physical strength and explosiveness. Till they add a bit of this I think they will continue to struggle. I'm yet to be convinced. I think they are a bit weaker than the media make out so i agree with you. They have nothing that i've seen in the midfield that's of any obvious quality, if we had any one of Malbranque, Lennon, Tainio, Jenas, Zakora i'd want us to replce with a better player. Huddlestone may have a future, we'll see if Modric is any goog here.

Everton ? Not a chance. The only clubs to break it will be the ones who are spending on top players, and THAT, is a stonewall certainty. I agree on principal, i think Everton could have done it this year if it wasn't for injuries to key players though. Liverpool were pretty poor by their standards this year.

Spot On. It's refreshing that a player moves for his career ambition and the chance of European football and a better coach, rather than moving to the club that offered him the better salary. Even if it is annoying that it's Spurs he is moving too. I don't agree. We have played in europe more than Spurs over the last decade and a half. And I don't accept that Newcastle can't be sold to a player as being bigger and better than Spurs. We ourselves have a bigger fanbase, a better stadium and also a well known high profile manager. The ONLY area where they score, is that they are in London, and not every player would see this as the be all and end all. I think it is in fact defeatist to accept that we lose out to such clubs like Spurs. This is why Keegan wasn't happy, see the article by bobyule on the main site which I read this morning. If this attitude is good enough for Keegan, it should be good enough for supporters of the club. They are just making excuses for failure to land a target. This defeatist mentality is something that is unacceptable, such an attitude smacks of the way we used to be. That won't go down well, but its the truth. incorrect no, it isn't. Its correct. That is why Keegan was unhappy about it all. What is it Keegans unhappy about? We bid for Modric, he chose someone else. We bid more but he chose someone else, that's life. I'd be amazed if Keegan's reputation was even known to Modric, i'd also be amazed if Ramos' wasn't. Get over it. Woodgate chose them too. Nothing to do with money, we all know Spurs have a tight wage structure and we all know we can pay more. But they have been a bit better organised lately and their profile seems quite good. You're not being objective, i think it's because you love the toon too much tbh. Look at it from an outsiders perspective, it's more than just because they're in london. Manchester and liverpool are shit holes by and large imo but they have no trouble pulling the players they want from nicer enviroments.

All 3 are better than Milner, but all 3 have their problems. All 3 are also likely to be over priced because they're English. However, we are a mid table team and have been for a few years. We might struggle to attract any better.

Yeah, Diarra looks like the only one who's up to much atm. He looks really good imo, shame we didn't sign him.

Based on what i've seen when in Portugal (when i've actually watched Sporting) i've thought Moutinho looked a bit too lightweight for the prem and not good enough with the ball to make for it either. Veloso on the other hand always seemed to have time on the ball and spread it around very nicely. More of a Carrick type DM than Makeke if you know what i mean. However i could have caught Moutinho on an occasional bad day and Veloso on a good one, you never know.

Couldn't he do that over the phone, MSN, etc? Not really. It was in jest, i know nothing about his role at the club. Just joking.

Couldn't he do that over the phone, MSN, etc?

Defence hasn't been bad lately. Would look a LOT better with a good replacement for Butt, someone who can really get around. Wouldn't be averse to a new CB but not at the expense of a replacement for Geremi, Milner and Viduka.

I reckon Everton would have finished 4th this year if weren't for their injuries.

Well, Man U, Chelsea and Arsenal aren't playing with traditional wingers. Maybe they'd be better if they did 4-3-3 has been pretty good for us lately. If it works and can be improved upon i don't see the point of changing it for just tradition. No, they don't play 4-4-2. They do play with wingers. The only wing play that comes from manutd in the traditional sense is from the fullbacks. Ronaldo plays far differently to a 4-4-2 winger. Arsenal don't have wingers either. The likes of Hleb are positioned out wide but are more inclined to come inside than hit the byline. Of course their wingers play differently to those in a 4-4-2, they have to by nature of the formation. But don't let that confuse you into thinking they don't play with wingers, because they do. Currently we play with 3 strikers and 3 defensive midfielders, all 6 of who are bereft of the ability to go past their man with the ball at their feet. We need to incorporate wingers into our system, either as a 4-3-3 (Or 4-5-1 or whatever you want to call it) or as a 4-4-2. I'd prefer to see 4-4-2 myself (Because I don't think any of our current strikers could play as a lone man up front and therefore there'd be too much needing to be changed over the summer), but if we can play with 1 up front and play like Man U do then I'll be perfectly happy. I'm not being pedantic and i'm trying to not be an idiot but.......... how do you deifne a winger? Nani, Ronaldo, Rooney are players who sometimes take up wide positions but none of them hug the touchline nor is pumping crosses in their forte. As mentioned previously, their FB's provide more of the 'traditional width.' I wouldn't really say Man U or Chelsea play 4-4-2, they use width if it's congested in the middle but both teams seem to concentrate on the through ball and over the top respectively. They've got good MF's who can pass accurately, but i would say the their MF's do not take up wide positions most of the time, their forwards do, Nani, Ronaldo and Rooney, Malouda, Anelka all work the wide areas as well as the channels.

Well, Man U, Chelsea and Arsenal aren't playing with traditional wingers. Maybe they'd be better if they did 4-3-3 has been pretty good for us lately. If it works and can be improved upon i don't see the point of changing it for just tradition.

Terry. Would probably need to sign a more "footballing" defender aswell with a bit of pace (imo) and Faye would then fill the DM position we currently need to buy for. I was massively impressed with Dunne when City played Liverpool earlier this season. Kept Torres quiet and was amazed how quick Dunne was, I always thought of him as a lumbering no nonsense centre back, but the lad can shift as well. i thought he was awesome at old trafford as well. he's turned from the white bramble into a top centre half dunne. I certainly haven't seen him much but it must have more of the former and not much of the latter. You guys all seem unanimous though.

Don't mean to be negative but to be honest, i've never been overly impressed with Dunne.